Legal News

The Court, Led by Stevens, (Mostly) Rules Against Shakespeare

By Ashby Jones

Turns out the justices of the Supreme Court debate over more than just the outcome of high-profile legal cases: They argue Shakespeare as well.

Specifically, it seems that a handful of justices have gotten serious over the so-called Shakespeare authorship question — uncovering the true identity of the writer of Hamlet, Macbeth and Titus Andronicus, which many have called the Bard’s worst play. Click here for the story, from the WSJ’s Jess Bravin.

Justice John Paul Stevens feels strongly that the writer of the plays was not Shakespeare, but the 17th earl of Oxford, Edward de Vere. Several justices across the court’s ideological spectrum say he may be right. That makes Justice Stevens a so-called “Oxfordian.”

Since the 19th century, some have argued that only a nobleman could have produced writings so replete with intimate depictions of courtly life and exotic settings far beyond England. Dabbling in entertainments was considered undignified, the theory goes, so the author laundered his works through Shakespeare, a member of the Globe Theater’s acting troupe.

But Justice Stevens says he became especially interested in Shakespeare when he attended the Chicago World’s Fair in 1933, where a replica Globe Theater presented many of the plays. Justice Stevens’s father ran the restaurant concession nearby.

Justice Stevens didn’t start thinking about the authorship question, though, until 1987, when he joined Justices William Brennan and Harry Blackmun in a mock trial on authorship. While he wasn’t entirely convinced at that point, subsequent research has persauded him that de Vere was the one.

Not all members of the court are persuaded. “To the extent I’ve dipped in, I’m not impressed with the Oxfordian theory,” says Justice Anthony Kennedy. But of the nine active justices, only Stephen Breyer joins Justice Kennedy in sticking up for Will. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito declined to comment.

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who retired in 2006, cast the court’s deciding vote many times. On Shakespeare, she says, “I’m not going to jump into this and be decisive.”

According to Justice Stevens, “Sandra is persuaded that it definitely was not Shakespeare” and “it’s more likely de Vere than any other candidate.” Pressed, Justice O’Connor says, “It might well have been someone other than our Stratford man.”

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on April 20, 2009 (boomark / email).